energies
Article
Optimization of a novel Hybrid Wind Bio Battery Solar
Photovoltaic System Integrated with Phase Change Material
Vijay Mudgal 1,† , Preeti Singh 2,† , Sourav Khanna 3, *,† , Chandan Pandey 4 , Victor Becerra 3 ,
Tapas K. Mallick 5 and K. S. Reddy 1






Citation: Mudgal, V.; Singh, P.;
Khanna, S.; Pandey, C.; Becerra, V.;
Mallick, T.K.; Reddy, K.S.
Optimization of a novel Hybrid Wind
Bio Battery Solar Photovoltaic System
Integrated with Phase Change
Material. Energies 2021, 14, 6373.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en14196373
Academic Editor: Carlo Renno
Received: 4 September 2021
Accepted: 30 September 2021
Published: 5 October 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Energies 2021, 14, 6373. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14196373
1 Heat Transfer and Thermal Power Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India; er.vijaymudgal@gmail.com (V.M.); ksreddy@iitm.ac.in (K.S.R.)
2 Simulate Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India;
presingh16@gmail.com
3 School of Energy and Electronic Engineering, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 3DJ, UK;
victor.becerra@port.ac.uk
4 Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad 201002, India; chandan@acsir.res.in
5 Environment and Sustainability Institute, Penryn Campus, University of Exeter, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK;
T.K.Mallick@exeter.ac.uk
* Correspondence: sourav.khanna1@gmail.com
† These authors are first authors.
Abstract: The intermittent nature of renewable sources, such as solar and wind, leads to the need
for a hybrid renewable energy system (HRES) that can provide uninterrupted and reliable energy
to a remote and off-grid location with the use of a biogas generator and battery. In the present
study, conventional PV panels have been integrated with phase change material (PCM) for power
enhancement. In addition, various configurations (i. PV-Wind-Battery system, ii. PV-PCM-Wind-
Battery, iii. PV-Wind-Biogas-Battery and iv. PV-PCM-Wind-Biogas-Battery) have been compared for
the hot and humid climatic location of Chennai, India. Optimization has been carried out to minimize
the cost of energy and the net present cost has also been computed. It has been found that the
integration of PCM with the PV-Wind-Biogas-Battery-based off-grid system results in savings of USD
0.22 million in terms of net present cost and reduces the cost of energy from USD 0.099/kWh to USD
0.094/kWh. Similarly, for another off-grid HRES configuration of PV-Wind-Battery, the integration of
PCM results in savings of USD 0.17 million, and reduces the cost of energy from USD 0.12/kWh to
USD 0.105/kWh.
Keywords: hybrid renewable energy system; solar photovoltaics; wind; battery; phase change
material; optimization; net present cost; cost of energy
1. Introduction
The availability of energy plays a very important role in the economic growth and
sustainable development of a society and nation. Around 10% of the world’s population
(789 million people), especially in remote areas, live without electricity [1]. Some of the
reasons behind this include the high financial cost of the extension of a grid network to such
areas, low population density, and several other cultural and social aspects. Most of the
people in these regions depend on fossil fuel and locally available traditional fuels, such as
wood and animal waste, to meet their energy demand, due to its easy availability. However,
there are several problems associated with using fossil fuel, such as high variability in the
prices, environmental degradation, and health issues. One of the solutions to overcome
the drawbacks of fossil fuel and provide clean and easy electricity in these regions is
using available renewable energy sources in that region [2]. This also results in economic
development, an improved ecological balance and human development [3]. However,
the intermittent and unpredicted power output of renewable sources results in a non-
viable power supply and creates the need for a methodology for obtaining reliable energy
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 2 of 21

from renewable energy sources. For an uninterruptible and viable power supply, various
energy sources can be integrated to meet the electricity demand. Such systems are called
hybrid renewable energy systems (HRESs), and usually consist of two or more renewable
energy sources. Some of the advantages of HRESs include (i) the optimum utilization of
renewable sources, (ii) improved controllability, (iii) increased load matching and (iv) the
lower operational cost.
Different techniques have been developed and used by researchers to find the most ap-
propriate size for a HRES. Tito et al. [4] suggested that the configuration of the HRES can be
considered as optimized if it can minimize the overall system cost or the cost of energy with
no unmet demand left over for all the classified socio-demographic load profiles of the site.
Jamshidi et al. [5] estimated the optimal size of a Wind-PV-Diesel generator-based HRES
using polynomial regression and support vector regression models. Alberizzi et al. [6]
used a mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP)-based optimization algorithm to find
the optimal size of an HRES for a place located in South Tyrol, Italy. Martin-Arroyo et al. [7]
investigated a stand-alone PV-Wind-based hybrid system using the smart spinning reverse
management method. Similarly, Das et al. [8] used metaheuristic optimization techniques
to find the optimal economical configuration to meet the electrical demand of a radio
transmitter station in India. The results show that the optimal configuration includes a
69.2 kW PV panel, a 16 kW biogas generator, a converter size of 30 kW, 21 battery bank
units, and an upper reservoir volume of 2081.5 m3 , with a total net present cost (NPC)
of USD 0.813 million. Rezzouk and Mellit [9] carried out the techno-economic feasibility
and sensitivity analysis of a PV-Diesel-Battery-operated HRES, with the penetration of PV
varying from 0% to 100%. From the results, it can be observed that system stability and
optimum performance can be achieved with 25% PV penetration. A sensitivity analysis
showed that global radiation has a significant effect on the NPC and CoE of the system.
Rahman et al. [10] showed that biogas and solar systems can be integrated to develop a
hybrid energy system that can meet both electrical load and thermal (cooking) demands,
and can efficiently replace conventional facilities. The results also show that monetary
savings worth USD 309 to 412 per year can be achieved by using the proposed hybrid
renewable energy system. Considering climate diversity and the energy efficiency of
buildings, Mokhtara et al. [11] investigated the optimal sizing and mapping of hybrid re-
newable energy systems for an off-grid building at seven different locations in Algeria. The
results show that climate zone and the energy performance of the building have significant
effects on the optimal sizing of the HRES. The study makes recommendations related to
efficient energy management between energy sources, stored energy and load demand
for the optimization of the overall HRES. Baruah et al. [12] carried out techno-economic
feasibility analyses of an HRES for the academic township in Sikkim, India, using HOMER.
The results show that the optimum system is a PV-Wind-Biogas-Syngas-Hydrokinetic-
Battery-based system with an LCOE of USD 0.095/kWh. Al-bonsrulah et al. [13] carried
out an analysis of a hybrid system for the Bahr Al-Najaf region. The results show that
the energy contributions of fuel cell, wind turbine and PV are 4.38%, 26.3% and 69.3%,
respectively. Katsivelakis et al. [14] performed a techno-economic analysis of a hybrid
renewable energy system on Donoussa Island, Greece, by varying the contributions (20%,
50% and 100%) of renewable energy resources. The results show that with a 50% renewable
energy contribution, a system can be obtained with 0% excess energy, an NPC of EUR
4,031,102.3 and a COE of EUR 0.2401/kWh. Kanase-Patil et al. [15] showed that an HRES
with micro hydropower, biomass, biogas, solar energy, wind and energy plantation, with
individual contributions of 44.99%, 30.07%, 5.19%, 4.16%, 1.27% and 12.33%, respectively,
can provide for the electrical and cooking needs of seven off-grid villages in Uttarakhand,
India. The results also showed that the optimal HRES system had 0.95 energy index ratio,
at the optimized cost of Rs 19.44 lacs and a COE of Rs 3.36 per unit.
Elavarasan et al. [16] carried out a study on the demand-side management of three dif-
ferent configurations of energy source, considering user satisfaction. The analysis showed
that, overall, the traffic in the load can be reduced significantly by reductions in summer
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 3 of 21

and winter peak load demands of 6.33% and 11.5%, respectively. Kumar et al. [17] car-
ried out a techno-economic and environmental study of a residential community in South
India, considering the SDG7 goals by integrating different system configurations of a photo-
voltaic/wind turbine/diesel generator/battery energy storage system (PV/WT/DG/BESS).
The results show that a hybrid renewable energy system with PV + DG + BESS is the most
cost-effective configuration for the location of the study. Li et al. [18] carried out a techno-
economic feasibility study of a hybrid renewable system used to meet the load demand
of a house in Urumqi, China, using different configurations of energy source. The result
shows that the total net present cost (NPC) of the system can be reduced by 9% and 11%
compared with a PV/battery and wind/battery power system if a hybrid system is used
employing PV/wind/battery. The sensitivity study performed by the authors also shows
that the total PV module generation of a hybrid system combined with a tracking system is
greater than that of a system with an optimized PV module tilt angle.
Wu et al. [19] carried out the multi-objective optimization of an HRES integrating
biomass CHP, PV and a heat storage system, considering economic and environmental
emissions. The result shows that the optimized system with percentage contributions
from CHP, PV and grid of 51.22%, 1.54% and 47.24%, respectively, can facilitate a trade-
off between economic factors and emissions. Suleman et al. [20] developed an HRES
employing solar and geothermal energy for multigeneration applications. The result
shows that by combing these two energy sources, the overall energy and exergy efficiency
of the system can reach 54.7% and 76.4%, respectively. Chang et al. [21] studied a bio-
hydrogen-based renewable system (BHIRES), which integrates the hydrogen generation of
biomass fermentation, renewable energy power generation, and electrolysis, for hydrogen
production and its further storage, and uses fuel cells for heat and power generation. The
analysis showed that the BHIRES is cost-effective as compared to wind/PV/hydrogen, and
reduces the cost of energy of the system by 9.6% from USD 1.005 kWh to USD 0.908 kWh.
The result also shows that the BHIRES system reduces the final cost of the system by 11.6%
as compared to a wind/PV/hydrogen system.
The experiment conducted by Karthick et al. [22] on an integrated PV-PCM system at
Kovilpatti, Tamil Nadu, India, using glauber salt (Na2 SO4 .10H2 O) as the PCM, showed
that the electrical efficiency of the PV panel was increased by 10% due to a reduction in
its operating temperature by 8 ◦ C. Stropnik and Stritih [23] showed that, with PCM, the
surface temperature of the PV panel can be lowered by a maximum of 35.6 ◦ C, resulting in
9.2% additional power compared to a conventional PV panel. Khanna et al. [24] analyzed a
finned PCM integrated PV panel, showing that the power produced by the PV panel in a
warmer climate increases in the range of 10.1% to 12.1%, and in colder climates it increases
in the range of 5.4% to 6.7%, as compared to the reference PV panel.
From the literature review, it can be observed that several researchers have optimized
a hybrid renewable energy system using different technologies and methodologies. How-
ever, no work has been found in the literature where a phase change material has been
integrated with a PV and hybrid renewable energy system. Phase change materials have
the ability to cool down the PV [25] and store huge amount of energy in a latent form,
consequently increasing the PV electrical efficiency [26]. The present study investigates
how the integration of a phase change material with a PV panel will affect the optimization
of the HRES, which thus has the potential to reduce the cost of energy. The mathematical
modeling and optimization of the system have been carried out.

2. Description of the Proposed System

In order to analyze the effects of different components, such as the PV, wind turbine,
PCM, biogas and battery, on the overall performance and cost of the hybrid renewable
energy system, four different configurations have been considered, as follows:
(i) Conf-1—PV–Wind–Battery system;
(ii) Conf-2—PV–PCM–Wind–Battery system;
(iii) Conf-3—PV–Wind–Biogas–Battery system;
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 4 of 21

(iv) Conf-4—PV–PCM–Wind–Biogas–Battery system.

The PV panel, wind turbine and battery bank are connected to the DC bus, whereas
the biogas generator and electric load are connected to the AC bus. To maintain the flow
of energy between the components of the HRES, a converter is used, which converts an
alternating current (AC) to a direct current (DC), or vice versa. The control panel is the
heart of the whole system, and it controls the flow of energy between the components.
Figure 1 shows the schematic representation of the proposed HRES.

Figure 1. System representation of Hybrid renewable energy system.

3. Description, Mathematical Modeling and Specification of System Components

3.1. Wind Energy System
A wind turbine is a device that converts the kinetic energy of wind into electrical
energy. The power output of the wind turbine depends upon various factors, such as the
turbine’s size, the wind speed and the height of the rotor, and is given by Equation (1) [27]

 aV 3 (t) − bPR Vci < V < Vr



Pw = PR Vr < V < Vco (1)

0 otherwise


PR Vci3
where a and b are given by a = and b = , P is the rated power of the
(Vr3 −Vci3
) ( 3
) R
Vr −Vci3
turbine (W), Vci is the cut-in wind speed, Vr is the rated wind speed and Vco is the cut-out
wind speed measured in ms−1 .
The output power of the wind turbine at different heights can be calculated by assess-
ing wind speed at the reference height. Equation (2) is used to calculate wind speed at
different heights !α
H
Vh = Vre f (2)
Hre f

where Vh and Vre f are wind speed (ms−1 ) at height H (m) and at reference height Hre f (m),
respectively, and α is the power law coefficient. Figure 2 shows the wind speed at the IIT
Madras, Chennai, India, for the whole year, and Table 1 shows the specifications.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 5 of 21

Figure 2. Velocity of wind at the location.

Table 1. Specifications of the wind turbine [28].

Parameter Unit Value

Pr kW 3
Vr m/s 12
Vci m/s 3.1
Vco m/s 24
Rated voltage V 240
Rotor diameter m 4.5
Swept area m2 15.1

3.2. PV System
The PV module is a device that converts solar irradiation into electrical energy. The
power output of a solar PV system depends upon several factors, such as the solar irra-
diance on the PV (GI ), the area of a panel (A), the number of panels (N), the operating
temperature of the cell (Tc ), the efficiency at STC (ηo ) and the degradation factor (dPV ).
Maximum energy is obtained from the PV panel when it operates in MPPT mode. The
power output of the PV panel is given by Equation (3) [29].
  
GI
PPV = ηo d PV 1 + β c ( Tc − 25) + γc ln GI A N (3)
1000

Table 2 illustrates the specifications of the PV panel used for the present study. Figure 3
shows solar radiation at the IIT Madras, Chennai for the complete year.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 6 of 21

Table 2. Specification of conventional photovoltaic panel.

Parameter Unit Value

Pmax W 250
Voc V 37.9
Isc A 8.59
V@Pmax V 30.94
I@Pmax A 8.08
FF % 76.11
ηo at STC % 15.9

Figure 3. Solar radiation at the location.

3.3. Phase Change Material

Phase change materials can store/release huge amounts of heat during phase tran-
sition. This property of the PCM makes it suitable for various heating and cooling ap-
plications, and also suitable for integration with renewable resources for efficient system
operation. Compared to a sensible heat storage system, the PCM-based latent heat storage
system has a much higher ability to store or release thermal energy [30,31], which can be
seen in the temperature vs. energy profile of the phase change material (Figure 4). The
energy Profile of sensible material with respect to temperature is OAB whereas energy
profile of phase change material with respect to temperature is OACD as shown in Figure 4.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 7 of 21

Figure 4. Temperature vs. energy profile of sensible and phase change material (latent).

3.4. PV-PCM System

A PV-PCM is an integrated system in which a phase change material is attached at
the back of the PV panel, as shown in Figure 5. The phase change material absorbs the
heat of the PV module and thereby regulates the operating temperature of the PV [32]. The
lower operating temperature of the solar cells increases the electrical efficiency [33,34] and
prevents the degradation of the panel, which improves the overall effective life of the panel.
It has been reported that PCM integration can improve the electrical efficiency of the system
significantly for hot climates as compared to cold climates [35]. Experiments conducted
by Japs et al. [36] at the University of Paderborn show that a PV-PCM-integrated system
can generate 3.05% more electricity compared to a conventional panel. The heat storage
capacity of the PCM depends upon the melting temperature of the PCM and its latent heat
capacity. Calcium chloride hexahydrate with a melting point of around 30 ◦ C and a latent
heat capacity of 191 kJ/kg is used as the PCM, and its thermophysical properties are listed
in Table 3. The mathematical model presented in the previous work [35] has been used to
evaluate the performance of the PV-PCM system.

Table 3. Thermophysical properties of the PCM (calcium chloride hexahydrate CaCl2 .6H2 O).

Thermophysical Properties Unit Specification

Melting point ◦C 30
Heat of fusion kJ kg−1 191
Thermal conductivity W m−1 C−1 1.08
Density kg/l 1.71
Specific heat capacity kJ kg−1 K−1 1.4
Kinematic viscosity m2 s−1 1.84 × 10−3
Thermal expansion coefficient K−1 5.0 × 10−4
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 8 of 21

Figure 5. Integrated PV-PCM system.

3.5. Biogas Generator

A biogas generator is a device that uses biogas as fuel and converts it into electrical
energy. Biogas is a mixture of gases produced by the decomposition of organic waste
in an anaerobic environment. The power output from the biogas generator is given by
Equation (4) [28].

Annual Biomass available ∗ CVBio ∗ ηBio

PBio = (4)
365 ∗ operating hours in a day ∗ 3600

The specifications of the generator are presented in the Table 4 [37].

Table 4. Specifications of generator [36].

Parameter Specification
Model ELEMAX SH5300EX Generator
4-stroke, single cylinder, side valve, Spark
Engine type
ignition engine
Ignition system Transistorized coil ignition (TCI)
Rated power 6.3 kW @ 3600 rpm
Generator AC output 5.3 kVA @ 220 V, 60 Hz
Cooling system Forced air cooling

3.6. Battery Bank Energy Storage System

The charging of the battery takes place when the power generated by the PV and
wind turbine is more than the demand. When the power produced by the PV and wind
is less than the demand, the battery bank acts as a secondary power source. The battery
bank’s capacity is selected based on the power required for a day, the battery efficiency,
and the energy demand. The characterization of the battery’s charge status and discharge
status is determined by the state of charge (SOC). The SOC is defined as the ratio of current
capacity to the nominal capacity of the battery. The battery is fully charged when the SOC
is 1 and battery is empty when the SOC is 0. The instantaneous SOC of a battery can be
calculated by Equation (5) [38].

σ∆t I (t).∆t.ηbat
SOC (t) = SOC (t − 1).(1 − ) + ( bat ) (5)
24 Cbat

where SOC(t) is the state of charge of the battery at time t, σ is the battery self-discharge
rate, Ibat is the battery current at time t (A), η bat is the battery charge efficiency and Cbat is
the capacity of the battery.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 9 of 21

The instantaneous battery current can be calculated by Equation (6).

Ppv/PCM (t) + Pwind (t) − Pload (t)

Ibat (t) = (6)
Vbat (t)

where Ppv/PCM (t) is the instantaneous power generated by the PV/PCM module, Pwind (t) is
the instantaneous power generated by the wind turbine, Pload (t) is the instantaneous power
demand and Vbat (t) is the terminal voltage of the battery. The capacity of the battery Cbat is
calculated by Equation (7) [39].

Cbat = ( ELoad AD )ηinv ηbat DOD (7)

where Eload is the total energy demand, AD is the daily autonomy, DOD is the depth of
discharge of the battery, η inv is the inventor efficiency, and η bat is the battery efficiency.

3.7. Converter System

In the present system, the wind turbine, PV/PCM panel and battery bank are con-
nected to the DC bus, whereas biogas generator and the electric load are connected to the
AC bus. Therefore, a converter is required to convert AC to DC, or vice versa, as per the
requirement to maintain the flow of power between the HRES components. The converter
consists of a rectifier and inverter assembly. The power output of the converter is given by
the Equations (8) and (9):
Pinv,out = ηinv PDC (8)
Prec,out = ηrec PAC (9)
where Pinv,out is the output power of the inverter, η inv is the efficiency of the inverter, PDC is
the DC power input, Prec,out is the output power of the rectifier, η rec is the efficiency of the
rectifier and PAC is the AC power input.

3.8. Load Profile

For the present study, a hostel in IIT Madras, Chennai, India is assessed for its electric
load. The electric load profile is the main influencing factor in the design and optimization
of integrated hybrid energy systems. So, it is very important to know how load varies
during weekdays and weekends in order for the hybrid system to achieve the maximum
utilization of resources and minimum system costs. The electric loads considered for the
present study are computers, fans, lights, electronic devices and machinery. The electric
load profiles of the Hostel during weekdays and during weekends are shown in Figure 6a
and Figure 6b respectively.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 10 of 21

Figure 6. Electricity demand (a) during weekdays (b) during weekends.

3.9. Constraints
The optimization of the hybrid integrated system has been achieved considering
different constraints, which are discussed as follows.

3.9.1. Lower and Upper Limit of Energy Source

In present study, the sizes of the PV-PCM, wind turbine, biogas generator and battery
bank were varied to find the optimum levels to meet the electricity demand of the hostel at
IIT Madras. The lower and upper limits of the PV-PCM, wind turbine, biogas generator
and battery bank are given by the following Equation (10):

0≤ Max
NPV-PCM ≤ NPV-PCM
0≤ NWT ≤ NWT Max
Max (10)
0≤ NBiogen ≤ NBiogen
0≤ Max
NBatt ≤ NBatt

where NPV-PCM , NWT , NBiogen and NBatt are the capacities of the PV-PCM panels, the wind
turbine and the biogas generator, and the number of batteries, respectively. The capacity
values of all the system components are considered as integer values.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 11 of 21

3.9.2. Battery Bank Operational Constraint

For the long life and effective functioning of the battery bank, it is important that the
charging and discharging of the battery is within safe operational limits. The battery bank
should not be overcharged or discharged below a limit. The operational constraints levied
on the battery bank for effective and safe working are given by Equation (11):

EBattmin ≤ EBatt (t) ≤ EBattmax (11)

where EBattmin and EBattmax are, respectively, the maximum and minimum allowed energy
values of the battery bank.

3.9.3. Wind Turbine Operational Constraints

The wind turbine power output depends on the wind speed. Only after the cut-in
(threshold) wind speed is power generation possible from the wind turbine. Additionally,
for safe operation, there is a cut-off wind speed after which the turbine is not operated.
The operational wind speed constraint imposed on the wind turbine for effective power
generation is given by Equation (12):

VCi ≤ V (t) ≤ VCo (12)

3.9.4. Power Reliability Constraints

The integrated hybrid renewable energy sources must always be able to meet the load
demand with zero percentage shortage. The loss of power supply probability (LPSP) is the
power exerted by the HRES to meet load demand. The LPSP is given by Equation (13) [39],

∑8760
t=1 LPS ( t )
LPSP = 8760
(13)
∑t=1 EDem (t)

Loss of power supply (LPS) at any time “t” can be calculated by Equation (14) [40]

LPS (t) = EDem (t) − EWT (t) − EPV/PCM (t) − EBiogen (t) − EBatt (t) (14)

4. System Operation and Optimization

4.1. Control Strategy and Operation
The operation of the hybrid renewable energy system is a priority-based interaction
between different energy sources. The control algorithm mediates between electric load
and the power output of the different energy sources. The control strategy operates with
the following objectives:
(i) To maximize the utilization of energy from PV and wind energy sources;
(ii) To minimize the storage capacity and operation of the battery bank;
(iii) To minimize the operation of the biogas generator so as to reduce the emissions and
the operation and maintenance cost.
The dispatch strategy of the HRES based on the priority of operation is described in
Table 5.
Table 5. Priority of operation of different energy sources.

Component Energy Availability Constraint Priority Level Remarks

Cheapest source of energy, no prime
PV Sunny hours Night time, cloudy sky 1
mover, no emission, less maintenance
Low and very high wind Cheap source of energy, no emission,
Wind turbine High wind speed 2
speed regular maintenance cost
When SOC is more Overcharging and Stored renewable energy can be used,
Battery bank 3
than zero discharging no emission
Over winding heating Involves running cost and regular
Biogas generator Always available 4 maintenance cost due to prime mover
limit emission
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 12 of 21

4.2. Net Present Cost

The net present cost (NPC) is the total present cost of the system (expense minus
revenue) incurred over the lifetime of the project. NPC includes capital cost, operation and
maintenance cost (O&M), replacement cost, fuel cost and salvage cost. NPC is calculated
using Equation (15) [41]
Cann
NPC =
(15)
CRF i, R proj
where Cann is the annualized cost and CRF is the capital recovery cost.

4.3. Cost of Energy

The cost of energy (COE) is the average net present cost of the generated electric
energy. COE is calculated as the ratio of annualized cost (Cann ) to the total energy generated
by the integrated system. COE includes capital cost, fuel cost, financing cost, and O&M cost.
COE is an important parameter for the optimization of the integrated renewable energy
system. COE signifies the revenue per unit of electric unit sold to recover the investment
and operation cost of the system. The COE is calculated using Equation (16),

Cann
COE = (16)
Eser

where Cann is the annualized cost and Eser is the useful energy generated by the integrated
system.

4.4. Capital Recovery Factor

The capital recovery factor (CRF) signifies the return on invested capital over an
investment’s life span. It is the ratio of a constant annuity to the present value of receiving
that annuity over the lifetime of a project. The CRF is calculated by Equation (17),

i (1 + i ) an
CRF = (17)
(1 + i ) an − 1

where i is interest rate (%) and an is annuity.

The economic data and operation life of different components of the HRES are listed
in Table 6.

Table 6. Cost of various components of HRES.

Replacement Cost
Component Capital Cost (in USD) O&M Cost (in USD) Life
(in USD)
Wind turbine 934/kW 50/kW/year 934/kW 25 years
PV Panel 300/kW 20/kW/year 300/kW 25 years
PV-PCM Panel 400/kW 25/kW/year 400/kW 25 years
Solar inverter and control panel 180/kW 8/kW/year 180/kW 15 years
Battery (200 Ah, 12 V) 150/batt 5/batt/year 110/batt 5 years
Biogas generator 400/kW 0.01/kWh 300/kW 20,000 h

5. Results and Discussion

In the present study, four configurations ((i) PV-Wind-Battery system, (ii) PV-PCM-
Wind-Battery, (iii) PV-Wind-Biogas-Battery and (iv) PV-PCM-Wind-Biogas-Battery) have
been compared. Optimization has been carried out to minimize the cost of energy and the
net present cost has also been computed. It has been found that the optimum configuration
of a PV-Wind-Battery system is the one with an 819 kW PV, a 321 kW wind turbine, 3957 Ah
battery storage and a 316 kW converter. After PCM integration, the optimum configuration
is the one with a 781 kW PV-PCM, a 278 kW wind turbine, 3980 Ah battery storage and a
391 kW converter. Similarly, the optimum configuration for the PV-Wind-Biogas-Battery
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 13 of 21

includes a 265 kW PV, a 228 kW wind turbine, a 420 kW biogas generator, 657 Ah battery
storage and a 184 kW converter. After PCM integration, the optimum configuration is the
one with a 224 kW PV-PCM, a 206 kW wind turbine, a 420 kW biogas generator, 633 Ah
battery storage and a 170 kW converter. The energy production and economic analysis are
presented in the following subsections.

5.1. Energy Analysis

The monthly energy contributions of various energy sources for different configura-
tions of the HRES are presented in Figures 7–10. It can be observed from Figures 7 and 8
(comparison between Conf-1 and Conf-2) that due to the integration of a PCM with the PV
panel, the percentage contribution of the photovoltaics increased significantly. The total
energy contribution of the photovoltaic increased from 1,217,961 kWh/year to 1,380,474,
even when there was a reduction in the installed PV from 819 kW to 781 kW. The pene-
tration factor of PV also increased from 132% to 150%. Similarly, it can be observed from
Figures 9 and 10 (comparison between Conf-3 and Conf-4) that due to the integration of
PCM with the PV panel, the percentage contribution of the photovoltaics increased signifi-
cantly. The total energy contribution of the photovoltaic increased from 340,835 kWh/year
to 394,079 kWh/year, even when there was a decrease in the installed PV from 265 kW to
224 kW. The penetration factor of PV also increased from 37.1% to 42.8%. A breakdown
of the energy analysis of all the configurations of the hybrid renewable energy system is
presented in Table 7.

Figure 7. Monthly energy contribution of Conf-1.

Energies 2021, 14, 6373 14 of 21

Figure 8. Monthly energy contribution of Conf-2.

Figure 9. Monthly energy contribution of Conf-3.

Energies 2021, 14, 6373 15 of 21

Figure 10. Monthly energy contribution of Conf-4.

Table 7. Energy analysis of hybrid energy system.

Capacity Penetration Energy

Configuration Component H of Contribution
Factor (%) Factor (%) Operation/y (kWh/y)
Wind turbine 28.4 130 7564 1,198,517
Solar PV 17 132 4373 1,217,961
Conf-1 Rectifier 3.02 - 2347 -
Inverter 11.4 - 4268 -
Wind turbine 28.4 113 7564 1,037,968
Solar PV-PCM 17.3 150 4373 1,380,474
Conf-2 Rectifier 2.29 - 2147 -
Inverter 10.1 - 4687 -
Wind turbine 28.4 103 7564 944,626
Solar PV 17.3 37.1 4373 340,835
Conf-3 Biogas gen 4.71 - 1260 173,320
Rectifier 5.39 - 2674 -
Inverter 14.2 - 3962 -
Wind turbine 28.4 92.6 7564 851,283
Solar PV-PCM 17 42.8 4373 394,079
Conf-4 Biogas gen 5.44 - 1477 200,266
Rectifier 4.36 - 2517 -
Inverter 13.2 - 4055 -

5.2. Economic Analysis

The optimization of all the configurations of the HRES was carried out on the basis
of the net present cost of the system, which includes the capital cost, operation and main-
tenance cost, fuel cost, and replacement cost minus the salvage cost of all components
over the time period of 25 years. A breakdown of the net present cost of all the configura-
tions of the hybrid renewable energy system is presented in Table 8. The NPCs of Conf-1,
Conf-2, Conf-3 and Conf-4 are USD 2.50 million, USD 2.32 million, USD 1.65 million and
USD 1.43 million, respectively. It can be observed that due to the efficiency enhancement
of the PV panel using a phase change material, there was a reduction in the principal,
operation and maintenance costs of the PV panel, thereby resulting in cost savings of USD
0.17 million between Conf-1 and Conf-2 and USD 0.22 between Conf-3 and Conf-4. The
cost of energy (CoE) of the HRES is also reduced due to the integration of PCM with the
PV panel. The CoE values of Conf-1, Conf-2, Conf-3 and Conf-4 are USD 0.12/kWh, USD
0.105/kWh, USD 0.099/kWh and USD 0.094/kWh, respectively.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 16 of 21

Table 8. Cost breakdown of net present cost of HRES system in different configurations.

Component Principal Cost O&M Cost (in Replacement Fuel Cost Salvage Cost
Total (USD)
(in USD) USD) Cost (in USD) (in USD) (in USD)
Wind turbine 449,400 207,487 0 0 0 656,887
PV 286,506 264,558 0 0 0 551,064
Conf-1 Converter and control panel 56,957 32,725 24,165 0 4548 109,300
Battery 592,650 255,383 383,950 0 52,057 1,179,926
Complete HRES 1,385,513 760,152 408,116 0 56,605 2,497,177
Wind turbine 389,200 179,692 0 0 0 568,892
PV-PCM 234,300 194,120 0 0 0 428,420
Conf-2 Converter and control panel 70,377 40,413 29,842 0 5617 135,015
Battery 597,000 257,258 386,769 0 52,440 1,188,587
Complete HRES 1,290,877 671,483 416,611 0 58,057 2,320,914
Wind turbine 319,200 147,373 0 0 0 466,573
PV 92,700 85,599 0 0 0 178,299
Converter and control panel 33,184 19,066 14,079 0 2649 63,680
Conf-3 Battery 97,050 41,850 179,018 0 4642 313,276
Biogas generator 168,000 80,195 96,115 302,591 16,249 630,652
Complete HRES 710,134 374,083 289,212 302,591 23,540 1,652,480
Wind turbine 217,622 127,373 0 0 0 344,995
PV-PCM 89,600 72,617 0 0 0 162,217
Converter and control panel 30,585 17,573 14,079 0 2442 59,795
Conf-4 Battery 98,400 43,191 182,354 0 4832 319,113
Biogas generator 168,000 68,412 80,974 261,156 27,165 551,377
Complete HRES 604,207 329,166 277,407 261,156 34,439 1,437,497

6. Sensitive Analysis
A sensitive analysis of the hybrid renewable energy system has been carried out for
configuration 4 to understand how variations in the costs of different components affect
the net present cost and the overall cost of energy.

6.1. Variation in PV-PCM Panel Cost

The NPC and CoE of the hybrid system have been evaluated via variations in the
PV-PCM’s cost, equating to a factor of 0.8 to 1.3 of its principal cost. The variations in the
NPC and CoE with changes in PV-PCM cost are shown in Figure 11. It can be observed that
with changes in the cost of the PV-PCM panel, there are variations in the NPC and CoE
of the system. With a 20% decrease in the cost of the PV-PCM system, the NPC and CoE
of the overall system will reduce to USD 1.41 million and USD 0.093/kWh, respectively.
Similarly, with a 20% increase in PV-PCM cost, the NPC and CoE of the HRES increase to
USD 1.46 and USD 0.095/kWh, respectively.

Figure 11. NPC and CoE of HRES with variation in PV-PCM cost.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 17 of 21

6.2. Variation in Wind Turbine Cost

The NPC and CoE of the hybrid system have been evaluated via the variations in the
wind turbine cost, which equate to a factor of 0.8 to 1.3 of its principal cost. The variations
in the NPC and CoE with changes in wind turbine cost are shown in Figure 12. It can be
observed that with a change in the cost of the wind turbine, there are variations in the
NPC and CoE of the system. With a 20% decrease in the cost of the wind turbine, the
NPC and CoE of the overall system will reduce to USD 1.39 million and USD 0.092/kWh,
respectively. Similarly, with a 20% increase in the wind turbine cost, the NPC and CoE of
the HRES increase to USD 1.46 and USD 0.096/kWh, respectively.

Figure 12. NPC and CoE of HRES with variations in wind turbine cost.

6.3. Variation in Biogas Generator Cost

The NPC and CoE of the hybrid system have been evaluated via the variations in the
cost of the biogas generator, which equate to a factor of 0.8 to 1.3 of its principal cost. The
variations in the NPC and CoE with changes in the cost of the biogas generator are shown
in Figure 13. It can be observed that with changes in the cost of the biogas generator, there
are significant variations in the NPC and CoE of the system. With a 20% decrease in the
cost of the biogas generator, the NPC and CoE of the overall system will reduce to USD
1.37 million and USD 0.088/kWh, respectively. Similarly, with a 20% increase in the biogas
generator cost, the NPC and CoE of the HRES increase to USD 1.48 and USD 0.0975/kWh,
respectively.
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 18 of 21

Figure 13. NPC and CoE of HRES with variation in biogas generator cost.

6.4. Variation in Battery Cost

The NPC and CoE of the hybrid system have been evaluated via the variations in
the battery cost, which equate to a factor of 0.8 to 1.3 of its principal cost. The variations
in the NPC and CoE with changes in the battery cost are shown in Figure 14. It can be
observed that with a change in the battery cost, there are variations in the NPC and CoE of
the system. With a 20% decrease in the battery cost, the NPC and CoE of the overall system
will reduce to USD 1.41 million and USD 0.090/kWh, respectively. Similarly, with a 20%
increase in the battery cost, the NPC and CoE of the HRES increase to USD 1.45 million
and USD 0.096/kWh, respectively.

Figure 14. NPC and CoE of HRES with variations in battery cost.

7. Conclusions
A hybrid energy system usually consists of two or more renewable energy sources
used together to provide increased system efficiency. For uninterruptible and viable power
supply, various cost effective energy sources, such as solar, wind, hydro, and biogas, can be
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 19 of 21

integrated together to meet the electric load demand in a reliable manner. There are various
advantages to a hybrid renewable energy system (HRES): (i) better utilization of renewable
energy, (ii) better load matching, (iii) better controllability, and (iv) lower operational and
maintenance cost.
In the present study, the performance of a hybrid renewable energy system consisting
of PV, PCM, a biogas generator, wind and battery has been investigated. It can be observed
that due to the ability of the PCM to absorb the heat from the photovoltaic panel, the
performance of the PV panel increases, which results in a reduction in the net present cost
and the cost of energy of the overall system. For the PV-Wind-Biogas generator-Battery-
based off-grid system, the integration of a phase change material with a PV panel results in
a saving of USD 0.22 million in terms of net present cost, and reduces the cost of the energy
of the system from USD 0.099/kWh to USD 0.094/kWh. Similarly, for another off-grid
HRES configuration of PV-Wind-Battery, the integration of a phase change material with
the photovoltaic panels results in a saving of USD 0.17 million, and also reduces the cost of
energy of the system from USD 0.12/kWh to USD 0.105/kWh.
The present work can be expanded by integrating the PV-PCM with other renewable
energy systems for different geographical locations. The PCM-based energy system can
also be integrated with a cogeneration energy system for enhanced system efficiency and a
lower cost of energy.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, V.M., P.S., S.K., C.P., V.B., T.K.M., K.S.R.; methodology,
V.M., P.S., S.K., C.P., V.B., T.K.M., K.S.R.; formal analysis, V.M., P.S., S.K., C.P., V.B., T.K.M., K.S.R.;
investigation, V.M., P.S., S.K., C.P., V.B., T.K.M., K.S.R.; writing—original draft preparation, V.M., P.S.,
C.P.; writing—review and editing, V.M., P.S., S.K., C.P., V.B., T.K.M., K.S.R.; supervision, S.K., V.B.,
T.K.M., K.S.R.; project administration, S.K., V.B., T.K.M., K.S.R.; funding acquisition, S.K., V.B., T.K.M.,
K.S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data can be made available on request to corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. UN. United nations—sustainable energy for all initiative launched in 2011. Available online: https://www.seforall.org/goal-7-
targets/access (accessed on 2 October 2021).
2. Al Siyabi, I.; Al Mayasi, A.; Al Shukaili, A.; Khanna, S. Effect of Soiling on Solar Photovoltaic Performance under Desert Climatic
Conditions. Energies 2021, 14, 659. [CrossRef]
3. Duran, D.C.; Gogan, L.M.; Artene, A.; Duran, V. The Components of Sustainable Development—A Possible Approach. Procedia
Econ. Financ. 2015, 26, 806–811. [CrossRef]
4. Tito, S.R.; Lie, T.T.; Anderson, T.N. Optimal sizing of a wind-photovoltaic-battery hybrid renewable energy system considering
socio-demographic factors. Sol. Energy 2016, 136, 525–532. [CrossRef]
5. Jamshidi, S.; Pourhossein, K.; Asadi, M. Size estimation of wind/solar hybrid renewable energy systems without detailed wind
and irradiation data: A feasibility study. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 234, 113905. [CrossRef]
6. Alberizzi, J.C.; Frigola, J.M.; Rossi, M.; Renzi, M. Optimal sizing of a Hybrid Renewable Energy System: Importance of data
selection with highly variable renewable energy sources. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 223, 113303. [CrossRef]
7. Martín-Arroyo, S.; Cebollero, J.A.; García-Gracia, M.; Llamazares, Á. Stand-Alone Hybrid Power Plant Based on SiC Solar PV and
Wind Inverters with Smart Spinning Reserve Management. Electronics 2021, 10, 796. [CrossRef]
8. Das, M.; Singh, M.A.K.; Biswas, A. Techno-economic optimization of an off-grid hybrid renewable energy system using
metaheuristic optimization approaches—Case of a radio transmitter station in India. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 185, 339–352.
[CrossRef]
9. Rezzouk, H.; Mellit, A. Feasibility study and sensitivity analysis of a stand-alone photovoltaic–diesel–battery hybrid energy
system in the north of Algeria. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 43, 1134–1150. [CrossRef]
10. Rahman, M.; Hasan, M.M.; Paatero, J.; Lahdelma, R. Hybrid application of biogas and solar resources to fulfill household energy
needs: A potentially viable option in rural areas of developing countries. Renew. Energy 2014, 68, 35–45. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 20 of 21

11. Mokhtara, C.; Negrou, B.; Settou, N.; Settou, B.; Samy, M.M. Design optimization of off-grid Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems
considering the effects of building energy performance and climate change: Case study of Algeria. Energy 2020, 219, 119605.
[CrossRef]
12. Baruah, A.; Basu, M.; Amuley, D. Modeling of an autonomous hybrid renewable energy system for electrification of a township:
A case study for Sikkim, India. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 135, 110158. [CrossRef]
13. Al-Bonsrulah, H.; Alshukri, M.; Mikhaeel, L.; Al-Sawaf, N.; Nesrine, K.; Reddy, M.; Zaghib, K. Design and Simulation Studies of
Hybrid Power Systems Based on Photovoltaic, Wind, Electrolyzer, and PEM Fuel Cells. Energies 2021, 14, 2643. [CrossRef]
14. Katsivelakis, M.; Bargiotas, D.; Daskalopulu, A.; Panapakidis, I.; Tsoukalas, L. Techno-Economic Analysis of a Stand-Alone
Hybrid System: Application in Donoussa Island, Greece. Energies 2021, 14, 1868. [CrossRef]
15. Kanase-Patil, A.; Saini, R.; Sharma, M. Integrated renewable energy systems for off grid rural electrification of remote area. Renew.
Energy 2010, 35, 1342–1349. [CrossRef]
16. Elavarasan, R.M.; Leoponraj, S.; Dheeraj, A.; Irfan, M.; Sundar, G.G.; Mahesh, G. PV-Diesel-Hydrogen fuel cell based grid
connected configurations for an institutional building using BWM framework and cost optimization algorithm. Sustain. Energy
Technol. Assess. 2021, 43, 100934. [CrossRef]
17. Kumar, N.; Chopra, S.; Chand, A.; Elavarasan, R.; Shafiullah, G. Hybrid Renewable Energy Microgrid for a Residential
Community: A Techno-Economic and Environmental Perspective in the Context of the SDG7. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3944.
[CrossRef]
18. Li, C.; Ge, X.; Zheng, Y.; Xu, C.; Ren, Y.; Song, C.; Yang, C. Techno-economic feasibility study of autonomous hybrid
wind/PV/battery power system for a household in Urumqi, China. Energy 2013, 55, 263–272. [CrossRef]
19. Wu, Q.; Zhou, J.; Liu, S.; Yang, X.; Ren, H. Multi-objective Optimization of Integrated Renewable Energy System Considering
Economics and CO2 Emissions. Energy Procedia 2016, 104, 15–20. [CrossRef]
20. Suleman, F.; Dincer, I.; Agelin-Chaab, M. Development of an integrated renewable energy system for multigeneration. Energy
2014, 78, 196–204. [CrossRef]
21. Chang, P.-L.; Hsu, C.-W.; Hsiung, C.-M.; Lin, C.-Y. Constructing an innovative Bio-Hydrogen Integrated Renewable Energy
System. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2013, 38, 15660–15669. [CrossRef]
22. Karthick, A.; Murugavel, K.K.; Ramanan, P. Performance enhancement of a building-integrated photovoltaic module using phase
change material. Energy 2018, 142, 803–812. [CrossRef]
23. Stropnik, R.; Stritih, U. Increasing the efficiency of PV panel with the use of PCM. Renew. Energy 2016, 97, 671–679. [CrossRef]
24. Khanna, S.; Reddy, K.S.; Mallick, T.K. Effect of climate on electrical performance of finned phase change material integrated solar
photovoltaic. Sol. Energy 2018, 174, 593–605. [CrossRef]
25. Khanna, S.; Newar, S.; Sharma, V.; Reddy, K.; Mallick, T.K. Optimization of fins fitted phase change material equipped solar
photovoltaic under various working circumstances. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 180, 1185–1195. [CrossRef]
26. Khanna, S.; Newar, S.; Sharma, V.; Reddy, K.; Mallick, T.K.; Radulovic, J.; Khusainov, R.; Hutchinson, D.; Becerra, V. Electrical
enhancement period of solar photovoltaic using phase change material. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 221, 878–884. [CrossRef]
27. Roque, P.; Chowdhury, S.; Huan, Z. Performance Enhancement of Proposed Namaacha Wind Farm by Minimising Losses Due to
the Wake Effect: A Mozambican Case Study. Energies 2021, 14, 4291. [CrossRef]
28. Chauhan, A.; Saini, R. Techno-economic optimization based approach for energy management of a stand-alone integrated
renewable energy system for remote areas of India. Energy 2016, 94, 138–156. [CrossRef]
29. Klugmann-Radziemska, E.; Wcisło-Kucharek, P. Photovoltaic module temperature stabilization with the use of phase change
materials. Sol. Energy 2017, 150, 538–545. [CrossRef]
30. Reddy, K.; Mudgal, V.; Mallick, T. Review of latent heat thermal energy storage for improved material stability and effective load
management. J. Energy Storage 2018, 15, 205–227. [CrossRef]
31. Reddy, K.S.; Mudgal, V.; Mallick, T.K. Thermal Performance Analysis of Multi-Phase Change Material Layer-Integrated Building
Roofs for Energy Efficiency in Built-Environment. Energies 2017, 10, 1367. [CrossRef]
32. Ahmad, A.; Navarro, H.; Ghosh, S.; Ding, Y.; Roy, J. Evaluation of New PCM/PV Configurations for Electrical Energy Efficiency
Improvement through Thermal Management of PV Systems. Energies 2021, 14, 4130. [CrossRef]
33. Bandaru, S.; Becerra, V.; Khanna, S.; Radulovic, J.; Hutchinson, D.; Khusainov, R. A Review of Photovoltaic Thermal (PVT)
Technology for Residential Applications: Performance Indicators, Progress, and Opportunities. Energies 2021, 14, 3853. [CrossRef]
34. Al Siyabi, I.; Khanna, S.; Sundaram, S.; Mallick, T. Experimental and Numerical Thermal Analysis of Multi-Layered Microchannel
Heat Sink for Concentrating Photovoltaic Application. Energies 2019, 12, 122. [CrossRef]
35. Singh, P.; Khanna, S.; Becerra, V.; Newar, S.; Sharma, V.; Mallick, T.K.; Hutchinson, D.; Radulovic, J.; Khusainov, R. Power
improvement of finned solar photovoltaic phase change material system. Energy 2020, 193, 116735. [CrossRef]
36. Japs, E.; Sonnenrein, G.; Steube, J.; Vrabec, J.; Kenig, E.; Krauter, S. Technical Investigation of a Photovoltaic Module with
Integrated Improved Phase Change Material. In Proceedings of the 28th European photovoltaic solar energy conference and
exhibition, Paris, France, 30 September–4 October 2013. [CrossRef]
37. Specification, Test Generator; Sawafuji Electric Co., Ltd. ELEMAX Generator SH7600EX: Owner’s Manual; 2015. Available online:
http://www.elemax.jp/products_ex.html (accessed on 22 March 2021).
38. Chiasson, J.; Vairamohan, B. Estimating the State of Charge of a Battery. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2005, 13, 465–470.
[CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 6373 21 of 21

39. Singh, A.; Baredar, P.; Gupta, B. Techno-economic feasibility analysis of hydrogen fuel cell and solar photovoltaic hybrid
renewable energy system for academic research building. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 145, 398–414. [CrossRef]
40. Kashefi Kaviani, A.; Riahy, G.H.; Kouhsari, S.M. Optimal design of a reliable hydrogen-based stand-alone wind/PV generating
system, considering component outages. Renew Energy 2009, 34, 2380–2390. [CrossRef]
41. Lian, J.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, C.; Yang, Y.; Chaima, E. A review on recent sizing methodologies of hybrid renewable energy systems.
Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 199, 112027. [CrossRef]